Hoi,
I have asked and received permission to forward to you all this most
excellent bit of news.
The linguist list, is a most excellent resource for people interested in the
field of linguistics. As I mentioned some time ago they have had a funding
drive and in that funding drive they asked for a certain amount of money in
a given amount of days and they would then have a project on Wikipedia to
learn what needs doing to get better coverage for the field of linguistics.
What you will read in this mail that the total community of linguists are
asked to cooperate. I am really thrilled as it will also get us more
linguists interested in what we do. My hope is that a fraction will be
interested in the languages that they care for and help it become more
relevant. As a member of the "language prevention committee", I love to get
more knowledgeable people involved in our smaller projects. If it means that
we get more requests for more projects we will really feel embarrassed with
all the new projects we will have to approve because of the quality of the
Incubator content and the quality of the linguistic arguments why we should
approve yet another language :)
NB Is this not a really clever way of raising money; give us this much in
this time frame and we will then do this as a bonus...
Thanks,
GerardM
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: LINGUIST Network <linguist(a)linguistlist.org>
Date: Jun 18, 2007 6:53 PM
Subject: 18.1831, All: Call for Participation: Wikipedia Volunteers
To: LINGUIST(a)listserv.linguistlist.org
LINGUIST List: Vol-18-1831. Mon Jun 18 2007. ISSN: 1068 - 4875.
Subject: 18.1831, All: Call for Participation: Wikipedia Volunteers
Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Eastern Michigan U <aristar(a)linguistlist.org>
Helen Aristar-Dry, Eastern Michigan U <hdry(a)linguistlist.org>
Reviews: Laura Welcher, Rosetta Project
<reviews(a)linguistlist.org>
Homepage: http://linguistlist.org/
The LINGUIST List is funded by Eastern Michigan University,
and donations from subscribers and publishers.
Editor for this issue: Ann Sawyer <sawyer(a)linguistlist.org>
================================================================
To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at
http://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.html
===========================Directory==============================
1)
Date: 18-Jun-2007
From: Hannah Morales < hannah(a)linguistlist.org >
Subject: Wikipedia Volunteers
-------------------------Message 1 ----------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 12:49:35
From: Hannah Morales < hannah(a)linguistlist.org >
Subject: Wikipedia Volunteers
Dear subscribers,
As you may recall, one of our Fund Drive 2007 campaigns was called the
"Wikipedia Update Vote." We asked our viewers to consider earmarking their
donations to organize an update project on linguistics entries in the
English-language Wikipedia. You can find more background information on this
at:
http://linguistlist.org/donation/fund-drive2007/wikipedia/index.cfm.
The speed with which we met our goal, thanks to the interest and generosity
of
our readers, was a sure sign that the linguistics community was enthusiastic
about the idea. Now that summer is upon us, and some of you may have a bit
more
leisure time, we are hoping that you will be able to help us get started on
the
Wikipedia project. The LINGUIST List's role in this project is a purely
organizational one. We will:
*Help, with your input, to identify major gaps in the Wikipedia materials or
pages that need improvement;
*Compile a list of linguistics pages that Wikipedia editors have identified
as
"in need of attention from an expert on the subject" or " does not cite any
references or sources," etc;
*Send out periodical calls for volunteer contributors on specific topics or
articles;
*Provide simple instructions on how to upload your entries into Wikipedia;
*Keep track of our project Wikipedians;
*Keep track of revisions and new entries;
*Work with Wikimedia Foundation to publicize the linguistics community's
efforts.
We hope you are as enthusiastic about this effort as we are. Just to help us
all
get started looking at Wikipedia more critically, and to easily identify an
area
needing improvement, we suggest that you take a look at the List of
Linguists
page at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_linguists. M
Many people are not listed there; others need to have more facts and
information
added. If you would like to participate in this exciting update effort,
please
respond by sending an email to LINGUIST Editor Hannah Morales at
hannah(a)linguistlist.org, suggesting what your role might be or which
linguistics
entries you feel should be updated or added. Some linguists who saw our
campaign
on the Internet have already written us with specific suggestions, which we
will
share with you soon.
This update project will take major time and effort on all our parts. The
end
result will be a much richer internet resource of information on the breadth
and
depth of the field of linguistics. Our efforts should also stimulate
prospective
students to consider studying linguistics and to educate a wider public on
what
we do. Please consider participating.
Sincerely,
Hannah Morales
Editor, Wikipedia Update Project
Linguistic Field(s): Not Applicable
-----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-18-1831
Hoi,
There is a request for a Wikipedia in Ancient Greek. This request has so far
been denied. A lot of words have been used about it. Many people maintain
their positions and do not for whatever reason consider the arguments of
others.
In my opinion their are a few roadblocks.
- Ancient Greek is an ancient language - the policy does not allow for
it
- Text in ancient Greek written today about contemporary subjects
require the reconstruction of Ancient Greek.
- it requires the use of existing words for concepts that did
not exist at the time when the language was alive
- neologisms will be needed to describe things that did not
exist at the time when the language was alive
- modern texts will not represent the language as it used to be
- Constructed and by inference reconstructed languages are effectively
not permitted
We can change the policy if there are sufficient arguments, when we agree on
a need.
When a text is written in reconstructed ancient Greek, and when it is
clearly stated that it is NOT the ancient Greek of bygone days, it can be
obvious that it is a great tool to learn skills to read and write ancient
Greek but that it is in itself not Ancient Greek. Ancient Greek as a
language is ancient. I have had a word with people who are involved in the
working group that deals with the ISO-639, I have had a word with someone
from SIL and it is clear that a proposal for a code for "Ancient Greek
reconstructed" will be considered for the ISO-639-3. For the ISO-639-6 a
code is likely to be given because a clear use for this code can be given.
We can apply for a code and as it has a use bigger then Wikipedia alone it
clearly has merit.
With modern texts clearly labelled as distinct from the original language,
it will be obvious that innovations a writers needs for his writing are
legitimate.
This leaves the fact that constructed and reconstructed languages are not
permitted because of the notion that mother tongue users are required. In my
opinion, this has always been only a gesture to those people who are dead
set against any and all constructed languages. In the policies there is
something vague "*it must have a reasonable degree of recognition as
determined by discussion (this requirement is being discussed by the language
subcommittee <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Language_subcommittee>)."* It
is vague because even though the policy talks about a discussion, it is
killed off immediately by stating "The proposal has a sufficient number of
living native speakers to form a viable community and audience." In my
opinion, this discussion for criteria for the acceptance of constructed or
reconstructed languages has not happened. Proposals for objective criteria
have been ignored.
In essence, to be clear about it:
- We can get a code for reconstructed languages.
- We need to change the policy to allow for reconstructed and
constructed languages
We need to do both in order to move forward.
The proposal for objective criteria for constructed and reconstructed
languages is in a nutshell:
- The language must have an ISO-639-3 code
- We need full WMF localisation from the start
- The language must be sufficiently expressive for writing a modern
encyclopaedia
- The Incubator project must have sufficiently large articles that
demonstrate both the language and its ability to write about a wide range of
topics
- A sufficiently large group of editors must be part of the Incubator
project
Thanks,
GerardM
it seems that people enter articles into quality assurance more often
than before having the flags - which at the end leads to higher
quality for these articles. but i am unsure if this feeling can be
better prooved somehow.
one thing seems to be a bug: with ff3 on linux i always get the
flagged revision and not the most current one, even if i unchecked
"show flagged revision" in the preferences.
rupert.
On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 2:02 PM, THURNER rupert
<thurner.rupert(a)redleo.org> wrote:
> it seems that people enter articles into quality assurance more often
> than before having the flags - which at the end leads to higher
> quality for these articles. but i am unsure if this feeling can be
> better prooved somehow.
>
> one thing seems to be a bug: with ff3 on linux i always get the
> flagged revision and not the most current one, even if i unchecked
> "show flagged revision" in the preferences.
>
> rupert.
>
> On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 11:14 PM, Andre Engels <andreengels(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2008/5/7 Lars Aronsson <lars(a)aronsson.se>:
>>> Erik Moeller wrote:
>>>
>>>> In a nutshell, FlaggedRevs makes it possible to assign
>>>> quality tags to individual article revisions, and to alter default
>>>> views based on the available tags.
>>>
>>>> Aka hacked up a nice script that shows how many pages have been
>>>> "sighted" (basic vandalism check) on the German Wikipedia:
>>>> http://tools.wikimedia.de/~aka/cgi-bin/reviewcnt.cgi?lang=english
>>>>
>>>> Given that FlaggedRevs has just been live for a day or so, a review
>>>> rate of 4.41% is quite impressive!
>>>
>>> Wait now. When FlaggedRevs was first mentioned, the press started
>>> to announce that censorship was being planned for Wikipedia.
>>> This was countered with the explanation that flagging was a more
>>> open regime than page locking. We no longer have to lock pages on
>>> controversial topics, because we can allow free editing as long as
>>> the non-logged-in majority gets to see the flagged/approved
>>> version.
>>>
>>> Is it really "impressive" to have this new "soft locking"
>>> mechanism applied to a large number of pages? Wouldn't it be
>>> better to show how few pages were in need of this protection?
>>> And at the same time, to mention how many previously locked pages
>>> have now been unlocked in the name of increased openness?
>>
>> No, I don't think so. Having a flag on a page is just a way of saying
>> "this version is ok". Would it not be much better to have a version
>> that is 'ok' for ALL pages rather than just the controversial ones?
>> Would it really be a good thing to say "Only these few pages have
>> versions that are okay, we have no idea about the others, but we see
>> no reason to think they're not okay?"
>>
>>
>> --
>> Andre Engels, andreengels(a)gmail.com
>> ICQ: 6260644 -- Skype: a_engels
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>
Just wanted to let the wider community (who don't
necessarily follow wikitech-l) know about this.
-Chad
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Tim Starling <tstarling(a)wikimedia.org>
Date: Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 2:14 AM
Subject: [Wikitech-l] $wgCentralAuthAutoNew=true
To: wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
$wgCentralAuthAutoNew is now enabled, which means new accounts created in
the usual way automatically become global accounts, they don't need to
manually merge.
-- Tim Starling
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Forwarding to foundation-l, I forgot it the first time.
--- On Thu, 21/8/08, Patricia Rodrigues <snooze210904(a)yahoo.se> wrote:
From: Patricia Rodrigues <snooze210904(a)yahoo.se>
Subject: Re: [Commons-l] [Foundation-l] PD-art and official "position of the WMF"
To: "Wikimedia Commons Discussion List" <commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Date: Thursday, 21 August, 2008, 5:55 PM
Dear everyone,
According to the Wikimedia Foundation's values (http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Values), "An essential part of the Wikimedia Foundation's mission is encouraging the development of free-content educational resources that may be created, used, and reused by the entire human community. We believe that this mission requires thriving open formats and open standards on the web to allow the creation of content not subject to restrictions on creation, use, and reuse."
Indeed, one of the milestones achieved by Wikimedia was the approval of the resolution about licensing policy across projects (http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Licensing_policy), setting up restrictions about how EDPs are to be implemented, and which legislations should be respected when writing up such EDPs. This is appliable to all projects except Commons,
which is expressively forbidden to have such a thing as an EDP - because EDPs are for non-free content, and Wikimedia Commons is supposed to host only free content (free defined as in http://freedomdefined.org/Definition).
In practice, things are a little bit different. Projects here and there have been setting up EDPs, and although there is no visible record of this (as far as I know), hopefully all these EDPs have been set up in accordance to this licensing resolution. I do not if such is supervised, but that is not really what I'd like to talk about today.
What I hopefully can point out today is that Commons is also not complying to the Four Freedoms, in light of its own licensing policy, which is the centerpiece of the project (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Licensing). We have several inconsistencies in our "subpolicies", but the biggest one has just been introduced: the modification to {{PD-Art}} that has been the topic
for this thread. The new wording on this template reflects a position of the community in light of opinions/positions of WMF staff members, and goes to the point of considering this an official position of the WMF.
So if you don't mind, I'd like to pose some questions:
*Is the official position of the WMF to consider only US copyright in what concerns content to be hosted in any Wikimedia project?
**If the answer is yes, is Commons included?
**If the answer is no, which copyrights should we consider to host content? Please specify the situation for Wikimedia Commons too.
*Is any WMF staff member entitled to give a "position" in behalf of the Board in a way that condones (even incites?) breaking the law outside of the US, in the sake of lobbying for Free Content/Licensing?
*Are the positions/opinions given by Erik and Mike to be considered for the National Portrait Gallery/UK copyright law only, or for any legislation that has
similar/equivalent problems, such as the Swedish one?
*Finally: if we are to consider US copyright only in this specific (PD-Art) matter, but non-US admins are required by some authority in their own country to take down any media that is copyrighted in that country, should admins defy the local authorities or the new Commons licensing?
I believe that if we start allowing exceptions of this kind, Commons does not fulfill its role as a media repository that is indeed free to reuse, and its existence is not making much sense. So I would like to know what is the future of this project, and whether it is more feasible to have local uploads everywhere else, tightly regulated with a legislation, whichever that may be, instead of a central repository of "more or less free stuff, it sort of depends, you know".
Thank you for your time.
Patrícia Rodrigues
Send instant messages to your online friends
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Ray,
We are talking about people who on or off list threaten others to kill, maim
and rape. We are talking about people associated with aggressive pov pushing
and using any means whatsoever to establish their pov. There have been
several examples given of this behaviour by credible people. Suggesting as
you do that there is no idea that we are talking about it not where we are
at.
When YOU do not know what is being discussed you either read up on it, do
some research, talk to people involved or keep out of it. Suggesting that
there is no clarity about such issues is exactly the kind of behaviour that
makes this situation worse because it leads to more procrastination. What is
needed is clarity to what extend the WMF is aware of this situation and what
involvement it can have, research is needed about the extend this type of
behaviour DOES affect our project and impacts the NPOV of controversial
subjects. This research is needed because it will prevent people from
ignoring or belittling this issue.
Thanks,
GerardM
----
Superbly expressed. Some respondents demonstrate a palpable lack of
perspective regarding this serious issue.
Months ago I initiated a proposal to eliminate the word "wikistalking"
because of exactly the problem that has manifested in this thread: it takes
a serious crime and trivializes it, fostering confusion on a subject where
victims already have a very difficult time making themselves heard and
believed.
With the notable exception of Gerard and a few others, this conversation is
occurring on an absurd level. It's as if David Shankbone had stepped
forward to announce that his car had been stolen, and responses had confused
real auto theft with the game "Grand Theft Auto."
-Durova
--
http://durova.blogspot.com/
Dear Wikimedia community,
We are proud and honoured to announce that a plan is in the works to
found a new UK chapter of the Wikimedia Foundation. A lot of
discussion has already taken place on IRC and we are ready to begin
gathering support from the community. If you are interesting in being
part of a new UK chapter, in whatever capacity (from sitting on the
board, to cheering us on from the sidelines), please head over to
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK_v2.0 and let us know. Over
the next few days we will gather names and put some finishing touches
to the plans. An election will be held for the initial board, who will
then oversee the process of founding the company and accepting
application to membership. They will then organise an AGM to formally
elect a new board to take the chapter forward to begin fundraising and
supporting the Wikimedia community in the UK in whatever way we can.
This is an exciting time for the UK community and I hope you will all
support us in it.
Kind regards,
Thomas "Tango" Dalton
Tom "Cfp" Holden
River Tarnell
Alex Newman
Paul Williams
Geni
Hello,
Would you like to tell us about your Wikipedia? I am afraid that many
know only about the Wikipedia he edits himself. At Meta-Wiki you can
answer to questions about your Wikipedia language edition and read
about others:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Tell_us_about_your_Wikipedia
Kind regards
Ziko
--
Ziko van Dijk
NL-Silvolde
I woudl like to dedicate this thread to the Wikimania of your dreams.
No argument, no debate, just ideas, a giant brainstorming of what the
Wikimania of your dreams would be. Please throw your stuff in, and try
to make it only positive things (ie.write "something that's green"
rather than "something that's not blue or red".)
here is the Wikimania of my dreams:
-It would be in a city easy to reach, with a big airport and cheap
flights incoming because it's a huge hub, or it would be next door
(Frankfurt airport ;-) )
- It would be in a top-notch conference facility, with tons of plugs
everywhere, air conditionned if needed, modular conference rooms, all
in one place and close to the accommodation building (a mix of
Cambridge, Alexandria for the conference facility, Taipei and
Frankfurt for access).
- It would have a great outdoor and indoor community area, with wifi
that works all the time, with comfy couches as well as ground mats for
the yoga-types, with coffee, cookies, juices and fresh water available
at all times. (a mix of Frankfurt and Taipei)
- It would have all the accommodation in one place, close to the
conference grounds, or even actually _on_ the conference grounds, and
it would be cheap but practical, clean and modern accommodation, with
different possibilities - share a room, not share a room, share a dorm
etc. (a mix of Frankfurt and Taipei)
-It would have an amazing range of food for lunches, which would be
served in a big room where annoucements and meetings can take place (a
mix of Taipei and Cambridge).
- It would take place in a really "wow" place so that we get speakers
to *want to come* to speak (Harvard or Bibliotheca Alexandrina)
- It would be close to sightseeing stuff for social evenings as
"discovery trips".
- It would have an amazing party location and an amazing party with
dancers with rotating hat-thingies (just like Alexandria!)
- It would host up to 500 people, not more, so I can get to meet
almost all of them. :-)
- And finally, to steal Sj's idea, it would have a giant rotating
Wikipedia globe that people could get into and make roll around like a
hamster wheel, just for the fun of it.
Cheers,
Delphine
--
~notafish
NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Your emails will get lost.
Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org
Dear Wikimedia community,
We are proud and honoured to announce that a plan is in the works to
found a new UK chapter of the Wikimedia Foundation. A lot of
discussion has already taken place on IRC and we are ready to begin
gathering support from the community. If you are interesting in being
part of a new UK chapter, in whatever capacity (from sitting on the
board, to cheering us on from the sidelines), please head over to
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK_v2.0 and let us know. Over
the next few days we will gather names and put some finishing touches
to the plans. An election will be held for the initial board, who will
then oversee the process of founding the company and accepting
application to membership. They will then organise an AGM to formally
elect a new board to take the chapter forward to begin fundraising and
supporting the Wikimedia community in the UK in whatever way we can.
This is an exciting time for the UK community and I hope you will all
support us in it.
Kind regards,
Thomas "Tango" Dalton
Tom "Cfp" Holden
River Tarnell
Alex Newman
Paul Williams
Geniw